I think these are some excellent suggestions. I would like to add an idea or two. In the commentary on the sound of equipment, it is not just the equipment that needs to be evaluated. The listener/reviewer should list his previous experience, and or previous "reference system" so we can understand his point of view. If he has previously only heard a Bose WaveRadio/CD, and he is reviewing an AA Capitole, then we need to know that. He may be very correct in his review, but can that review be considered valid when trying to learn the smaller differences between the products in a much closer competition. Now we know that if Alberporter or Mike Lavigne reviewed something, they would have some top notch experience with some great gear to give credence to their opinions. Even with myself, I think I have a pretty good ear, but I have not heard alot of the gear that is out there, personally. So some point of reference for us to understand the reviewer's reference points is important. I think answering a question like "What is the best quality sound system you ever heard?" might do it. Then we know if the piece he is reviewing is above or below his reference point. I think this is crucial for others to know.
Improving reviews
This idea was put out by Jadem6 and I thought it wa a good one. What can be done to improve the quality of reviews, or secondly, do they need to be improved. Some of the reviews IMO have been great while others have been lacking. While I think the idea of having equipment reviews is a good one and it appears AudiogoN is trying to build a library for future use, are we accomplishing the goal? Obviously the suggestion is not to develop guidelines so stringent that there is no fun in writing but would a more defined set of goals or perameters help with the quality?
As my name suggests; I have more questions than answers. Okay resident geniuses take up the challenge!
As my name suggests; I have more questions than answers. Okay resident geniuses take up the challenge!